Nancy learns about political gymnastics

Thursday

Sep 20, 2012 at 6:00 AM

Dianne Williamson

Time once again to field questions from Nancy Naive, who poses a series of queries about current events.

So, what’s going on in the world?

Nancy, I hardly know where to begin. Here in Worcester, we continue to suffer the consequences of low voter turnout, as the City Council adopted a pro-union ordinance that will effectively bar nonunion shops from bidding on public construction projects.

That doesn’t seem fair.

It’s not fair at all. It’s a shameless, shortsighted move that will probably burden the taxpayer and land the city in court. In other words, just a typical vote of the City Council.

Why did they do it?

Well, if you ask them, they’ll prattle on about investing in the community, neglecting to note that, by shilling for the deep-pocket unions, they’re mainly investing in their re-election. And they clearly don’t fear the consequences of catering to special interests, probably because getting people to vote in Worcester is like trying to draw Puerto Ricans to a GOP fund-raiser. As a result, only the special interests vote.

Speaking of elections, isn’t there a big debate tonight?

Yes. Incumbent U.S. Sen. Scott Brown will debate Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren, in a compelling and closely watched race that has caused numerous obnoxious quarrels on Facebook among people who used to be friends. If you’re not on Facebook, you’re missing some of the most astute political analysis of our time, if by astute political analysis, you mean, “analysis containing many bad words.” People feel quite strongly about this election and everyone is looking forward to tonight’s debate, especially those who’ve planned a drinking game that calls for tequila shots whenever Scott Brown refers to Warren as “professor.”

But she is a professor, right?

Yes, but the Brown camp believes that “professor” is a pejorative term, because it refers to someone who is smart.

Isn’t being smart a good thing?

Of course it is, but Republicans have adopted this bizarre strategy of equating intelligence with out-of-touch elitists who favor insidious anti-American goals, such as higher education and helping the poor.

I don’t get it.

It’s difficult to explain, but the strategy began with Sarah Palin and was embraced by Rick Santorum, who famously called Barack Obama a “snob” for wanting young Americans to go to college, as though the president was encouraging them to squander their student loans on polo ponies. But tonight will also be fun because poor Scott Brown is furiously trying to distance himself from Mitt Romney, and Warren will do everything in her power to link them, short of chromosome fusion.

How come?

Nancy, haven’t you heard? We used to think Mitt Romney was just a meandering, unprincipled politician with no firm values — in other words, a perfect candidate for higher office — but we’ve recently learned that he harbors a firm and principled dislike for money-grubbing entitled street rats, otherwise known as the elderly.

What??

At a $50,000-a-plate fundraiser in May, Romney let loose and said a lot of things he’d never say had he known he was being taped. For example, referring to his wife’s role in the campaign, he said, “We use Ann sparingly right now, so that people don’t get tired of her.” The bad news is, he sounded like a jerk. The good news is, at least we know he stands for something. Personally, with this gaffe breaking so soon after his Libya comments landed with such a thud, I think he’s secretly courting the sympathy vote.

What has the reaction been like?

Democrats think Christmas came early this year, and even some Republicans, as noted, are subtly distancing themselves. “That’s not the way I view the world,” said Scott Brown, adding, “Mitt Romney? Isn’t that a laundry detergent?” We tried to get a response from Bill Clinton, but he was still addressing the Democratic National Convention.

Changing the subject, what’s this I hear about Jesus having a wife?

A historian has identified a scrap of papyrus from the fourth century that says, “Jesus said to them, “My wife …” The discovery raises many provocative questions. Did Jesus really have a wife? If so, who did the dishes? After he converted water into wine, would she make him take out the garbage? If they went on a cruise for their honeymoon, did she get annoyed when Jesus walked next to the ship?

Wow. How could this have been a secret for so long?

It’s simple, Nancy. In the next sentence, on the scrap of papyrus, Jesus added, “We use my wife sparingly right now, so that people don’t get tired of her.”